HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1994 0615 CC REG ITEM 11J�I 7(P?5,
DOPpF,RK. CA�,�^ITEM ,
Cou.,ncil�Moal,,:
ACTION: �=
AGENDA REPORT 7
CITY OF MOORPARK
By
TO: The Honorable City Council r
FROM: Baldemar Troche Public Works Management Analyst t /J
DATE: June 10, 1994 (CC Meetinq of June 15, 1994)
SUBJECT: Consider Report on the Ilse of Alternative Fuels for
City Vehicles
OVERVIEW
This presents an analysis and comparison of a number of vehicle
fuel sources other than gasoline.
BACKGROUND
For years, gasoline has satisfied all necessary fueling
requirements of vehicles. However, gasoline powered vehicles
emit harmful emissions that pollute the air. Utilizing
alternative fuels, through government intervention and support,
can reduce vehicle emissions. Alternative fuels is a term used
to refer to fuels other than gasol ne.
There are no current State or Federal requirements for the
utilization of alternative fuel powered vehicles. However,
vehicle fleet operators are able to receive monetary incentives
and /or credit programs for conversion of gasoline powered
vehicles to operate on an alternative fuel. Staff has received
tentative approval of a Regional Surface Transportation Program
(RSTP) grant fund in the amount of $10,500.00 for vehicle
conversion to alternative fuel (refer to Exhibits 'A' and 'B').
The California Clean Air Act of 1988 mandates that two percent
of all vehicles sold in California must meet zero emission
requirements in the year 1998. Furthermore, ten percent of all
vehicles sold in California in the year 2003 must meet zero
emission requirements. According to Keith Duval, Manager of the
Rule Development Section for the Ventura County Air Pollution
Control District (APCD) , APCD has not set: any regulations or
requirements for fleet operators. Mr. Duval believes that once
APCD's requirements are finalized and distributed, said
regulations will "mirror" the 198'-1 California Clean Air Act
mandates.
\veftic es \fuel_93b.rpt
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 2
The Federal government has introduced a number of legislative
acts pertaining to the utilization and implementation of
alternative fuels. Two such acts are the Federal Clean Air Act
and the National Energy Policy Act. The Federal Clean Air Act
of 1990 mandates a decrease in air pollution caused by
extraction, refining, and combustion of petroleum based fuels.
In addition, this Act aims to increase energy security by
encouraging conversion to vehicles operating on alternative
fuels that can be produced and distributed in the United States.
The intent of the National Energy Policy Act of 1992 is to
reduce vehicular use of petroleum (gasoline) fuels by 10% by the
end of the century and 30% in the succeeding decade.
DISCUSSION
The alternative fuel options presented below were developed with
assistance from Bob Miller, City of Thousand Oaks; Roger Huff,
Las Virgenes Water District; Wayne Tanaka of Southern California
Gas Company; Ray Turpene, City of Simi Valley; and the article
"Alternate Fuel Use in MSW Operations" by John Trotti. In
addition, to the information presented below, Exhibit 'C'
presents a summary of major comparisons between alternative
fuels.
A. Description of Alternative Fuels
1. Diesel -- Fleet managers from the City of Simi Valley and
the City of Thousand Oaks are shifting their attention
away from diesel fuel. It appears that diesel fuel can
not be reformulated sufficiently to meet California clean
air standards for the year 1994 and beyond. As such,
diesel fuel as an alternative fuel option was not
considered in this report.
2. Reformulated Gas (RFG) -- One option to refining petroleum
into gasoline is to add "oxygenates" (typically alcohols
or ethers) which reduce carbon monoxide emission levels
during cold weather. RFG has two great advantages over
other alternative fuels: (1 it requires no modification
of existing fuel distribution and delivery facilities, and
(2) it requires no modification of existing vehicle fuel
systems.
It is not currently possible to meet clean air act
standards and keep fuel octane ratings high by using 100%
petroleum based ingredients. However, a Phase 2
reformulation process, scheduled for introduction in 1996,
is expected to net greater reductions in overall
emissions, not just carbon monoxide, when compared to all
other alternative fuels. At present time, Staff was
unable to locate a reformulated gas fueling station.
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 3
3. Methanol / Ethanol
a. Methanol -- Methanol is a liquid that is clear,
odorless, and tasteless. 'this fuel is utilized by race
cars due to its higher octane which provides quick
acceleration. Methanol is biodegradable and produces
emissions low in nitrogen oxide (NOx) and particulates.
This fuel is highly corrosive requiring many parts of
the vehicles, fuel system be made of special materials
such as stainless steel. As such, gloves must be worn
and protective measures taken when handling the fuel.
According to Bob Miller, City of Thousand Oaks,
methanol has less than half the power equivalent of
diesel, is quite toxic, and can produce blindness or
cause kidney failure in humans if ingested. Methanol
combustion produces large amounts of formaldehyde, a
cancer - causing substance. Methanol is highly volatile,
has a relatively low flash point, and burns with a
colorless flame, making a fuel fire very difficult to
see.
There is only one station in the area (Simi Valley)
which carries methanol t"uel. Two (2) gallons of
methanol would be necessary in order to get the same
MPG rating as one gallon of gasoline. Methanol is more
toxic but less expensive --lo produce than ethanol.
b. Ethanol -- Though ethano�. has a clean burn, it has
about half the energy density of gasoline, is more
expensive, and is energy- s_ntensi.ve to produce. Staff
was unable to locate an ethane- fueling station or
further research material;.
4. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) / Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) --
Though natural gas is combustible in its ambient form, it
must be compressed (CNG) or liquefied (LNG) for efficient
storage or transport. CNG is pipeline gas compressed to
3,500 psi for bulk storage. It is then transferred at
3,000 psi for vehicle use,. When natural gas is
refrigerated to -260F, it turns to liquid for high energy -
density transport and storage. Typically, LNG is passed
through a heat exchanger, whe -e t is returned to gas form
prior to use in an engine.
The following local public agencies are presently testing
CNG as an alternative fuel: Ci.ty of Thousand Oaks, and Las
Virgenes Water District. Both agencies have CNG stations
located in their Maintenance Yards. The City of Simi
Valley will also be utilizing CNG in the near future.
Staff was unable to locate l)ca agencies utilizing LNG.
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 4
CNG has a much cleaner burn than the other fuels. When
compared to gasoline, CNG produces 25% less carbon
dioxide. Due to its clean burn, wear of the internal
engine is reduced. Thereby engine maintenance costs
(engine oil changes and engine tuneups) is reduced by
approximately 25 %.
CNG storage tanks must be 1/4 to 1/2 inch thick to retain
the compressed gas (2,400 - 3,000 psi) and maintain a safe
storage system. When compared to a vehicles' 12- gallon
gasoline tank, CNG storage tanks require 3 to 4 times the
allotted space. The CNG vehicle storage fuel tanks
account for considerable space and add to vehicle weight.
Conversion costs from gasoline to CNG is approximately
$3,000 - $5,000. However, the principal obstacle to
widespread use of CNG is the cost of compressors for
refueling: $4,000 or more t -or a "slow- fill" overnight
facility; and up to $17,000 - $40,000 for a "fast- fill"
facility which produces the equivalent of 30 to 100
gallons of gasoline a day (depending on the unit). The
"slow- fill" option is considerably less expensive at the
sacrifice of the quicker (equivalent to a gasoline service
station) refueling option offered by the more expensive
compressors. Current fill -uo Locat: ions are shown on the
attached map (Exhibit. 'D')
Staff met with Wayne Tanaka of Southern California Gas
Company (SCGC) to discuss :�NG as an alternative fuel
option (refer to Exhibit 'E'). SCGC will co -fund up to
25% (not to exceed $1,750.00 of the incremental cost for
each CNG vehicle converted
5. Propane, a Liquid Petroleum. Gas (LPG) -- Propane is a
mixture of petroleum and natural gases that becomes liquid
under pressure or at reduced temperatures. Propane is
non - toxic, and is odorized to make leak detection easy.
LPG is used in a wide variety of residential, commercial,
industrial, agricultural applications, motor engines,
space heaters, stoves, and c,ther appliances.
Propane reduces engine wear during cold starts due to its
low pressure (12psi) when the fuel enters the engine.
However, due to its low oct-ane rating, a reduction in
engine compression ratio is required. As a result,
decreased fuel economy and engine performance (loss of
10 % -15% in motor power) results. In addition, vehicle
storage fuel tanks are heavy and bulky in order to provide
safety. The fuel system must be pressurized from 175psi
to 250psi to keep the fuel I 1 liquid state.
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 5
Emissions emitted from a propane powered vehicle are not
as good as those emitted from a CNG fuel powered vehicle.
Propane fueling stations are available throughout the
County, including one within the City of Moorpark. When
compared to gasoline, as shown on Exhibit 'F', a net loss
is achieved. The available storage room capacity is
greatly decreased to accommodate the propane tanks.
6. Electricity -- An electric motor vehicle produces zero
emissions. It is estimated that vehicles produced to run
on electricity are more expensive to purchase than other
alternative fuel vehicles. Present vehicle electrical -
batteries are heavy, take up considerable space, and do
not provide sufficient storage capacity to enable a
vehicle to travel over 100 miles.
Two types of batteries being tested are nickel -iron
batteries and sodium sulfur batteries. An electric
powered vehicle using a nickel -iron battery, with a life
expectancy of eight years or 100,000 miles, offers twice
the storage capacity of thf typical lead acid storage
batteries in use today. Scdium sulfur batteries offer
similar results.
With access to electricity readily available, recharging
capabilities are easy to accommodate. However, recharging
methods will have to improve before refueling such
vehicles can be accomplishes' :i.r a relatively short time
frame.
B. Overview of Alternative Fuels
Current stringent emissions standards will require the
utilization of alternative fuels in the near future.
Consumers want a fuel that is readily available and can
provide milage cost - per -mile performance comparable to or
better than gasoline. When alternative fuels are compared to
gasoline in terms of range of travel, alternative fuels fall
short. As such, alternative fueling methods will have to be
further developed to provide --onsumers a quick and easy
method for refueling their vehicles.
With an increasing number of alternative fuel refueling
stations available in the future, the driver will be assured
of alternative fuel source availability and will, therefore,
be inclined to travel greater distance. In the meantime
extensive long -trip use will be limited.
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 6
C. Conclusion - Recommended Alternative Fuel Option
An attempt at quantifying the cost effectiveness of this and
other alternative fuel sources is set forth in Exhibit 'F'.
At this point in time, the use of alternative fuels is not
cost effective when compared to gasoline. If the City
Council wishes to proceed with the use of, or conversion to,
an alternative fuel source in order to participate in efforts
to reduce emissions, it is the opinion of staff, based on the
above analysis, that the City select Compressed Natural Gas
(CNG) . Presently, CNG appears to rank the highest as a long-
term cost effective alternative. fuel. source.
D. Conversion Costs
The cost of converting one vehicle to operate on a CNG fuel
source is summarized in Exhibit ''G'. In addition to the
estimated vehicle conversion cost of $5,000, it is
recommended that a "slow -fill" refueling station be
installed. This element of the project requires a one -time
expenditure for a facility whic.:h would serve the first and
all subsequent CNG powered vehicles. The estimated cost of
this facility is $4,300. This facility allows for the
overnight refueling of one CNG powered vehicle. Such a
facility could be accomplished by installing a natural gas
line from the Community Center building to a secured area
within the maintenance storage area at the southwest corner
of the Civic Center property. This re- fueling equipment can
be relocated when the maintenance storage area is moved to
its ultimate location. A more detailed description of a
slow -fill refueling station is set forth in Exhibit 'H'.
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 7
E. Grant Funding
The potential grant funding for this project is summarized as
follows:
• Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) will co -fund up to
25% of the conversion cost (not to exceed $1,750.00). The
estimated SCGC rebate is $1,750.00.
• Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) has
approved a grant to the Cite in the amount of $10,500.00
(see Exhibits 'A' and 'B').
• Staff submitted a Clean Air Fund Grant Application, for
the conversion of the 1991 isuzu Trooper as described in
this report, in the amount of $5,920.00. At the April
28, 1994, Clean Air Fund Advisory Committee meeting, the
Committee recommended conversion of new vehicles or
purchasing gasoline /alternative fuel powered vehicles (see
Exhibit 'I'). As such said application was denied.
The total amount of grant funds iva it able for this program is
$12,250.00.
F. Selection of Candidate Vehicle
A list of the City fleet of vehi ,les is displayed as follows:
CITY OF MOORPARK FLEET VEHICI i LIST
Vehicle No.
License Number
Mila c
VehicVe Desergrtion
1
F 353464
5,300.4
19L, ,)odge Dakota
2
F 093152
63,8(X).3
198 ford 1 350 1 = n
3
1:479727
70,700.4
19& lord Ranger
4
N 360026
7,750.2
194 ?-ord 1, 250 3/4 Con
5
1: 283577
18,430.8
194 +'he% -y 35(10 Dwnp Truck
6
E 087488
43,230.0
198 Dodge Aries
7
li 330431
9,800.2
199 Isunr'1 rooper
8
E 114394
47,300.8
1941 Ford 7 ompo CI
9
F 341468
22,530.4
194 �'hevy 2500 314 Ton
10
E 285998
23,520.4
494 ,'hevy 15W Halt Ton
11
E 36047
200
194.; (;MC Acne 'I ruck
12
1: 362399
300
1994 Hyundai Excel
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 8
F. Selection of Candidate Vehicle (continued)
If the City Council wishes to proceed with the CNG conversion
of one of these vehicles, staff recommends that the Isuzu
Trooper ( #7) be selected. This vehicle is driven locally by
Code Enforcement and as such can be monitored for fuel
efficiency. The Dodge Aries ( 16) is an older vehicle and is
expected to be replaced in the near future. The pool cars
( #8 and #12) are driven to farther destinations, and as such
are not recommended for conversion until CNG refueling
locations are more readily available. Truck ( #1 - #5 and #9-
#11) conversion to CNG would mean a loss of storage capacity
and, without "fast- fill" fueling capability, these vehicles
would not be readily available for emergency use.
G. Fiscal Impact
If the City Council decides to proceed with this project, the
estimated total project cost is $19,030.00. Costs to
facilitate this project include: vehicle conversion
($5,000.00), refueling station ($4,300.00), fence
($4,000.00), construction '4,000.00), and a ten percent
contingency ($1,730.00). An itemized list of these costs are
shown on Exhibit 'G'. If approved, it is recommended that
this amount be appropriated from the Equipment Replacement
Fund (account no. 031.3.999.999) 'which has a FY 1993/94
balance of $106,393.22. Said appropriation will be partially
off -set by the grant fund revenues described in section E of
this report, in the amount of il? 250.00. The cost to the
fund will only be $6,780.00.
The figures at the bottom of Exhibit 'G', support the
findings set forth in Section C above, that this program is
not cost effective. It will take over one hundred years to
amortize the $6,780.00 net cost to the City. The only
benefits of this program is air quality benefits.
Alternative Fuels
June 1994
Page 9
H. Alternative Action Plans
Should the City Council determine that air quality benefits
warrant proceeding with alternative fuels, the following
three options are available:
Option 1. Determine that conversion to CNG is not cost
effective at present time. Direct staff to present a
subsequent Alternative Fuel Report in 1 -2 years.
Option 2. Direct staff to submit. a Clean Air Fund Grant
Application for the purchase of a new CNG powered vehicle
including the installation of j "slow fill" station at the
City Hall yard. Staff will request from VCTC that the RSTP
grant monies be appropriated fcr said expense.
Option 3. Proceed with the conversion project as described
in this report. The following steps would be required:
A. Approve an appropriation cr funds from the Equipment
Replacement Fund and an amendment to the FY 1993/94 Budget
to add said project in the imount .,f $19,030.00 (Account
number 041.4.131.904);
B. Develop plans and specificat;_ons for CNG conversion of the
Isuzu Trooper, and for the ;nstallation of a "slow- fill"
station at the City Hall yard;
C. Solicit proposals for fuel sc,,urce conversion upon approval
of RSTP grant monies from VCTC. VCTC expects Federal
approval of the grant monies in December, 1993. The
project can not be advert .sec until the approval is
finalized;
D. Obtain appropriate permil.s and proceed with the
installation of a CNG "slow - fill" station at the Civic
Center maintenance storage irea; and
E. Proceed with the fuel source conversion of the Isuzu
Trooper and the procurement and installation of the CNG
slow -fill equipment.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Counci take the following action:
Determine that conversion to CNG is not cost effective at
present time. Direct staff to present a subsequent Alternative
Fuel Report in 1 -2 years.
Exhibit A
November 8, 1993
MOORPA RK
799 Moorpark Avenue Moort)arF ';ali °orni:b 93021 (W'))
Ventura Count -y Transportation Commis_.io-
Attn: Ginger Gherardi
950 County Square Drive, -Ste. 707 -
Ventura, CA. 93003
Re: Fleet Alternative Fuels Convers _or- Pr-ojec -:
Dear Ms. Gherardi:
Pursuant to your letter dated November 2 1.993, copy enclosed, this
is to request that Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC)
serve as lead in filing the necessary documentation for obtaining
federal funds in the amount of $10,500.(') for the subject project.
The City will meet the local match of 1.,�7° $1,360.00) for the
project.
The project description calls for the development of plans and
specifications for Compressed Natural Gis ;CNG) conversion of the
Isuzu Trooper, and for the installation yf a "s_I ow -f ill" station at
a site to be determined -Tli6 oa tsmat-ed t- ota-l= project cost for the
project is $19,030.00 as shown on the �c-..tache(l exhibit.
Thank you for your cooperation. If ( -)t. haje any questions or
concerns, please contact me at (805) �- 333(-)4 x -253.
Sincerely,
Baldemar Troche
Public Works Management Analyst
cc: Ken Gilbert, Public Works Director
Mary Lindley, Assistant to the Cil ,, Manacter
\Cltlzcn \110893 -1tr
W LAWRASON JR
Maya
SCOTT MONTGOMERY PATRICK 0)141^
�.iayor Pro Tum tH
J(iRN !_ WOZNIAK
�,nun�aln ��•i nlny
Exhibit B
AIMEW
n�1OAM11VMCh M��
November 2,.1993
Mr. Baldmar Troche
Management Analyst
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
V1 NIMelk (.)UNIl'
I R/�NSI'( >It I A LION (.OMMISSK)N
RF (-F) VFD
fq 0 V 1993
to:
I inv,•
V, .,I, — (A'!1111)1
I %1U 6
',) 1,4 2111111
)7111', 7,41 I YI I
1 !W. 111()1,1 (,4.? 41160
Dear Mr. Troche:
Per our conversation last week, the Ventura County Transportat+lYoie
VCTC is willing to serve as lead in filing
Commission ( ) !- edera:l funds for the City
necessary documentation for obtaining x" o ect to be funded with
Fleet Alternative Fuels Conversion P RSTP
Regional Surface Transportation Prograr fund_. C ( )•
VCTC allocated a total of $88,530 in itSTP funds for clean fweth
vehicles for use by the cities of !Ioorpark and Oxnard, The
ll be
Moorpark's federal share being 1 e'' S01 Ica match of 11 147 0 or
responsible for providing the re
$1,360.
Since the project contains funds for k, +ott► the cities oespeocially
and Oxnard, VCTC is willing to serve as lead agency, unti next fiscal
since Oxnard is not ready to move on ti e proj
year.
VCTC (or any other agency) cannot obli-gate funds for the project
until it is amended into the 1993 -99 Regional Transportation
Improvement Program (RTIP). The project was submitto alfos
amendment into the RTIP last August , and federal app r
expected around December I. We are also � orkalg f teas obtain
direct
required Master Agreement with Cali) :ins tc, qualify
recipient of federal funds. We hol: y to lave a fully executed
agreement by December.
For our records, please provide us wit.'' a letter requesting that we
serve as lead. Also, provide us wits- a detailed description with
the project including how funds will oe applied and project cost.
This will allow us to begin the proc, of l)bligatinq funds.
Please note that because the projec involves federal funds, a
simple agreement (containing federal':ondit ions/ requirements found
in the Master Agreement with Caltrans between our two agencies may
be required for our records. The agreement would simply include
City
those requirements imposed by the federal government that the
with
of Moorpark is already subjected to under- Y agreement
Caltrans for receipt of federal. fill-IC
Clean Diesel
PRO Available
Minimal cost
Better mileage
Lower emissions
20% -30% less
particulates
CON Smoke
Spillslleakage
Non - renewable
Reformulated Gas
Available
Minimal Cost
All engines
Lower emissions
New catalytic converter
High cost/mile
Smog forming
emissions spilUleakage
Non renewable
ALTERNATIVE FUELS COMPARISON
Methanol
High octane
Liquid storage
Blendable
Low NOx
Bio-degradable
Diverse sources
Corrosive
Explosive vapor
Limited production
Limited distribution
Low -energy
InviAl le name
i oxrc
Formaldehyde
Ethanol
High octane
Liquid storage
Blendable
Low NOx
Bio-degradable
High cost
Limited productiori
Limited distribution
Low Energy
Energy output same
as input
formaldehyde
CNG
Convertible
US resource
Low cost
Low hazard
Low emissions
Minimum processing
Slow refueling
Limited distribution
Quality variations
High pressure
Medium NOx
Energy to compress
LNG
Same engine as CNO
Low Cost
Low hazard
Low emissions
Minimum processing
Slow refueling
Limited distribution
Cryogenic handling
Requires venting
Difficult storage
Medium NOx
Energy to liquefy
Reference: "Alternate Fuel Use in MSW Operations ", by John Trotti
MSW Management, May /June 1993, pg. 101.
LPG
Wide distribution
Long history
Low emissions
Slow refueling
60% energy of diesel
Heavy vapors
Medium NOx
Energy to liquefy
r -.
N•
W
rt
n
low:
cts
Ca-
C4 r; _ 1�►
Sy
r? 9
.• it � • .'� _ � ��
Y . i
43
fa
Exhibit E
Questions asked of Wayne Tanaka, Southern California Gas
Company.
QUESTIONS
1. Why is CNG better than the other alternative fuel options"
2. What is the CNG ratio to gasoline?
3. Where are CNG fill -up stations located /available?
4. What other Cities /Public agencies are utilizing CNG?
5. If our V -8 Ford Tempo gets 240 miles on a 12 gallon tank (20 n )g)
how many CNG tanks would be necessary to accomplish the sam
milage ratio?
A. What are the CNG tank dimensions?
5. What vehicle repair shops are available, in the area, that are far, iar
with CNG components?
1. What is the cost to add the CNG fuel system to the existing gas tic
fuel system (switch -over system)?
3. List of shops that perform conversion.
?. What are the operational cost comparison?
10. Amortization schedule.
11. If at a later date we decide to convert backto a gasoline powem !
vehicle, what would the cost be?
12. What are the maintenance cost associated with CNG?
13. What benefits are available to the City of Moorpark for CNG
conversion?
14. Are there any conditions to be placed if CNG is utilized?
15. If a CNG fill -up station is installed in the City Hall Yard, wha
permits would be required?
A. What are the cost associated for installation /running the face 9
ANSWERS
See attached materials.
1 18 Therms per gallon of gas.
1 Therm = 100MBTU's.
Scc attached map.
Scho( l Districts: Lompoc, San Luis Obispo,
LAUSD, Riverdale (7), Antelope
Valley, Santa Goleta Union
Cities: Irvine, San Luis Obispo, Long
Beach
Other: CALTRANS, SLO County, Santa
Barbara County
3 to 4 space ration.
12 gallon gas tank = 36 to 48 gallon
tank of CNG)
Varies
ivt Tanaka gave me list which includes 5 II r
companies.
53,000.00 - $4,000.00
List of 5 companies.
25% less maintenance
No Answer
About $2,000.00
','7, less maintenance when compared to
gasoline powered vehicles
$1,500.00 rebate.
Gas /Electrical /Fire Dept. clearance
1 4, approximately .50 cents per gallon of
CNG.
ALTERNATIVE FUEL SAVINGS ANALYSIS Page 1 -',
� 21- Oct -93
Filename: �pw�alt_fuel.wkl
II
DESCRIPTION Gasoline Propane Methanol CNG Best Alternative Fuel Option
- - - -- - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - ----------------------------------------------
1 ! Annual Miles Driven 10,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 0,000.00
2
Miles per Gallon
16.00
13.60
8.00
5.60
3 Gallons per.,,Year 1 625.00 735.29 1,250.00 1', 785.71
(Line 1 / Line 2)
4 Cost of Fuel „per Gallon 1.28 1.50 0.87 0.45
I I j
Annual Fuel Cost 800.00 11102.94 1,081.50 803.57 l
ring ? v Tlne 41 II
Lost of uij (nanaP_s i m 12n no nn no nn no an no
1'nCt of Tun nn = e
it
8 Total Annual Cost 1 1,070.00 ! 1,237.94 1 1,222.50 1 1,006.07
(Lines 5 +6 +7) I
II 9 Monthly Cost 89.11 j 103.16 j 101.88 83.84
(Line 8 / 12)
j ----------y------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1 10 I Total Annual Savings
When Compared to Gasoline xxxxx (167.94) (152.50) 63.93
11 Monthly Savings When
Ij Compared to Gasoline xxxxx (14.00) (12.71) 5.33
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)
c
rt
h
Exhibit G
17- Hay -94
---------------------------------------------- - - - - -- Filename: \pw\cng_cost.wkl
--------- - - -... -------- - -•• -- ------ - - - - --
---- ------- - - - - --
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Amorization Schedule II
1
2
3
4
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
---------------------------------- - - - - --
Conversion Cost
"Slow -fill" refueling station
*Fence (for overnight refueling)
Construction of gas & electrical
line to the site
--------------------------- - - - - -- j------- - - - - -,
17,300.00
1,730.00
Total Capital Cost
10% Contingency
5,000.00
4,300.00
4,000.00
4,000.00 1
Estimated Total Project Cost 19,030.00
RSTP Grant 10,500.00
i
City Hatch (11.470) of RSTP Grant 1,360.00
City 5,420.00
I
Southern CA Gas Co Rebate 1,750.00
Monies Available for Project
- - - -- ;------ - - - - --
19,030.00
Net City Cost
Monthly Savings of utilizing CNG
Number of Months to Recover City
Investment of $6,780.00
Number of Years to Recover City
Investment of $6,780.00
6,780.00
5.33
1,272.05
106.00
Remarks
I *If done after library improvements, cost would be 0.
Therefore, estimated Total Project Cost would be
$14,630.00 Net City Cost would be $2,380.00.
Number of months to recover investment of $2,380.00
is 446.53 37 years).
See Exhibit D'
Net City Cost(Monthly CNG Savings
• 1. . _ � ••+'Y��u.,.- .;..;,�,.v!••rl *.�? ..- l'•w^! --car � .,,.:t;,,.�_ �. . h�.v� �x�.:.�.,..._.:•..:,y w..r,..•..,c.,,r.r..
•'7� f
Announcing Convenient On -Site Refueling
`e�! news fo- a!l owners and operators
ti'aloral Gas Vehicles-F,uelMaker
�1sJ c> rnducling a l,,t w0re convcnienl...
e spent vI R Ln rr s .r... r:1
F'uelMaker is the wadd'� first personal _,sr
,:d;ural gas refueling v tr " — ,.,e recall .,f me, n-
years of intensive research and
development. Here's how it
works. After the appliance is
lapped into any residential or commercial gas line and
an electrical supply, it is ready to be connected to any
.a vehicle th:v is equipped for
i natural gas nprralion, ~witch
the PuclNlaker on... and the unit
a� compressc. the rcgulnr low
pressu n• gas into the vclucicS
t
hu•I I:mks.
MAKING THE CONNECTION IS EASY
( o]-wt ing Illy I'umINIakcr lu your vrhiric lakos only
nn. -ILL. Aimplc align Ihr lid, rrnwvc the refueling hay.
lV hen rclueimg is finished the appliance slops
autunmlically Unplug the refueling hose from
Ule vehicle and store it bark in the appliance
If yr w;ult it, drive ih,
vchlile before the tank is
DUAL HOSES AND ( '
MULTIPIF FUEEMAKERS
uriNIAur appliance delivers
the natural gas equivalent of 3B
litres I I U.S. gallon) of g;isoline per hour. And most
1,011 vchicica eul be refueled in four to six hours. Mlle
appliance ran fill one vehicle al a lime. or with Ih(.
addition of :I serund hose, two vchirlcs sinudtancuusl)•.
large fleeI al K•rd' r m;ly "rill
dX1DOI ",
In inst;Ill nudliple units to ❑u•cl I
their greater refueling muds 1
,)filers nary 111111 11 ndv:unagcum �—
v.
lo manifold :evrnd l`uolAlakers —C
lugclher lu reliml l.vgc vehio,
urlt a. heavy it ark, ur box s.
Appliance, r,ln aL o by r.""him .1 with 'Ili. 'it'. sImov,
to provide :l fa.l till lot rouunci ri;d u.rr <.
h n,u
Ill, ;ipl liancr :md pluO lhr uniih•
il,i,� Ihl c,dlirlr I'Ini Ihr "til)1kl'
Lolllul .InJ ,io.r Illy lid. l -halt all
Ills r. lu it I, ulllid, IrII' nuall� Io ell.
fn�i\ LEI •�I„IIl�pii,llyn6l�ilhrl.nn,k I
INDEPENDENT METERING
FOR ACCURATE COST CONTROL
u.l olnrl. „bo I•- ilnin- .I rnngdric rrrol d nl
unl.11l.di�ul ,:t iu, h, nhi.11 I•.. nntrl. bl -line 11�
ING WITHOUT THE R" q** AROUND'
1 I I
a Moll
1,
1
•I
f -r
i I tt —i` ---- -i.-.-
1
r�
x
r•
c
r•
rt
x
EXHIBIT I
_ Ventura County
Air Pollution
Control District
May 9, 1994
Baldemar Troche
City of Moorpark
Public Works
799 Moorpark Ave.
Moorpark, CA 93021
Mr. Troche:
702 County Square Drive tei 805/645 -1400 Richard H. Baldwin
Ventura, Californic 930( fc, 805/645 -1444 Air Pollution Control Officer
11 EQLE:b'awt 7 LEE c..�
MAY 1 1 191.94
CITY OF MOORPARK
I regret to inform you that the Clean Air Fund Advisory Committee did not approve
funding for the City of Moorpark's proposal to convert one vehicle to compressed
natural gas (CNG). However, the committee would still like to encourage the
introduction of CNG vehicles by the City of Moorpark. The committee is likely to be
more receptive towards a project that would introduce a new CNG vehicle rather than
the conversion of an existing vehicle. This is due to the fact that, in general,
conversions do not achieve the same level of emission reductions as new CNG vehicles.
Please contact me at 645 -1412 or Joan Wolf it 6415 -1445 if you have any questions
regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Mike Villegas
Engineer, Rule Development Section